Friday, February 12th 2021

Intel Apparently Discounting 10th-Gen CPUs in Bid to Claw Market from AMD

Intel has apparently begun discounting its desktop CPUs, perhaps in a bid to try and maintain market share earning momentum the company garnered in the last few months. As AMD struggles to keep up with consumer demand for its latest Ryzen 5000 series, Intel looks to be capitalizing on its vertical integration (as well as the fact that Intel owns its own fabs and fabricates in a more than mature 14 nm process). A interesting move by the blue giant, who has generally opted out of a price reduction strategy - a move that might make Intel look on the back foot, and as an alternative budget brand, to the incommensurately smaller AMD.

Various retailers have been carrying Intel inventory with much reduced prices over their official MSRP. Amazon, for example, is offering the Intel Core i7-10700K for $344, down from its average pricing of $383. In the same retailer, the iGPU-less i7-10700F processor is down from $315 one month ago to just $229. Odds are that this is an Intel decision because if one considers the amount of demand on PC products and components due to COVID-19, it's very likely that consumers who can't get an AMD 5000-series CPU will still choose to purchase hardware - even if it has to be from Intel. So retailers eschewing part of their profits at a time like this seems slightly off-character.
Source: TechSpot
Add your own comment

103 Comments on Intel Apparently Discounting 10th-Gen CPUs in Bid to Claw Market from AMD

#51
ThrashZone
Hi,
Prices always drop you just have to wait 6-8 months for it.
Posted on Reply
#52
billEST
ThrashZone
Hi,
Prices always drop you just have to wait 6-8 months for it.
yes 3600 up from 160 to 250

motherboad + 50 e
Posted on Reply
#53
Mr Bill
Don't know a thang :D about Ryzen's is this a good deal?
Posted on Reply
#54
Prima.Vera
this year 11700K, but also 12700K CPUs will come out.
Does anyone else cares about the 10xxx series??
Really....
Posted on Reply
#55
Raendor
Prima.Vera
this year 11700K, but also 12700K CPUs will come out.
Does anyone else cares about the 10xxx series??
Really....
11700 is barely faster, so price/perf 10700 is great right now. 12700 will be interesting being a complete new arch.
Posted on Reply
#56
Legacy-ZA
I would have upgraded to Intel, if I knew I wasn't going to have to change my socket as often, screw them.
Posted on Reply
#57
Lionheart
Legacy-ZA
I would have upgraded to Intel, if I knew I wasn't going to have to change my socket as often, screw them.
Then enjoy your 4 core forever.
Posted on Reply
#58
billEST
Lionheart
Then enjoy your 4 core forever.
dual core 2410m + ssd and little graphique card on asus portable x53 9 year : work well for office / multimedia use

2500K =4770S = 1600X X 370 = 10400 F B460 = ipad pro basicaly no difference all day normal task

with 1060 3 gb / or 580 or 5700XT monitor 4 K / dual screen 4K 2K / tv 4K

all ssd or nvme
Posted on Reply
#59
Mr Bill
billEST
dual core 2410m + ssd and little graphique card on asus portable x53 9 year : work well for office use

2500K =4770S = 1600X = 10400 F = ipad pro basicaly no difference all day normal task

with 1060 3 gb / or 580 or 5700XT

all ssd or nvme
If it wasn't for the gamers, Intel and AMD would have to be giving their processors away, although they still might be selling the Xeon's for workstations. :D
Posted on Reply
#60
moob
RandallFlagg
If you're near a microcenter, it's even better.

10600K for $189. 10700K (yes K) is $279. 10850K is $350.

10400 is $129 and 10700 is $249, which both come with a stock cooler - and you can use the stock cooler with both of those no problem.
Not only are the Intel CPUs on sale, but at least at my MC at Tustin, they have 25+ 5600X, 25+ 5800X and a single 5900X in stock as well. Seems like we have a lot of options for CPUs.

GPUs on the other hand...
Posted on Reply
#61
billEST
Mr Bill
If it wasn't for the gamers, Intel and AMD would have to be giving their processors away, although they still might be selling the Xeon's for workstations. :D
the revolution was the SSD , 6 / 8 /12 core ... not amd was cool 2 year after they become like intel

i prefer a processor 20 degres less work well withh ddr 2666 or 2933 than hotdog maker and ddr 4000 with X570 with fan

M1 is the right way
Posted on Reply
#62
Mr Bill
Micro Center Houston.
billEST
the revolution was the SSD , 6 / 8 /12 core ... not amd was cool 2 year after they become like intel

M1 is the right way
You're correct! the SSD was probably the best and cheapest performance component since the IBM 8088. :D
Posted on Reply
#63
billEST
houston we have a problem intel is so good .....

11400 or 11500 with Z490i asus or Z490 hero with dual thunderbolt 4 wifi 6 E is a kill combo for office use

or 10700 with Z490 asus creator price down
Mr Bill
Micro Center Houston.


You're correct! the SSD was probably the best and cheapest performance component since the IBM 8088. :D
or amd 8088 :p

amd 8088 - Bing images
Posted on Reply
#64
Legacy-ZA
Lionheart
Then enjoy your 4 core forever.
Nah, Zen 4 will be mine, easy peasy. Would have gotten Ryzen 5000, but last CPU in the socket too, no thanks. :)
Posted on Reply
#65
cst1992
Legacy-ZA
Nah, Zen 4 will be mine, easy peasy. Would have gotten Ryzen 5000, but last CPU in the socket too, no thanks. :)
Avoid that with RAM too - don't get the last DDR4 architecture. Or if you do, get all the RAM you'd want now.
Posted on Reply
#66
r9
Rowsol
230 is an insane deal.
Intel as the "value" option that's just funny stuff.
Personally I could care less if it's Intel, AMD or NVIDIA when buying components I only care about price/performance and looking at the overlocked benchmarks.
The 10th gen are pretty good performers, it's not like the AMD FX series which were so far behind Intel in gaming that they were not a good option at any price.
billEST
not so lock , marvelous mid motherboard , perfect for itx

Intel Core i5-10400F 130 euro in germany

insane !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Very nice performers!
Pair that with a cheap mobo and you get a lot bang for not a lot of bucks.
Posted on Reply
#67
Legacy-ZA
r9
Intel as the "value" option that's just funny stuff.
Personally I could care less if it's Intel, AMD or NVIDIA when buying components I only care about price/performance and looking at the overlocked benchmarks.
The 10th gen are pretty good performers, it's not like the AMD FX series which were so far behind Intel in gaming that they were not a good option at any price.


Very nice performers!
Pair that with a cheap mobo and you get a lot bang for not a lot of bucks.
Well regardless, we won't see those price cuts here in South-Africa, not a chance, too much greed.

$577,36 for a 10700... so yeah.
Posted on Reply
#68
evernessince
Mr Bill
Since I'm old and clueless, is it just the gamers that have to have the latest and greatest? Or, is it also some normal everyday PC users with lots of money that have a need for speed? Because my old 4th Gen i5 with 16 gig ram, just smokes across the web, of course my 1GHz internet helps. I can remember when there were lines out overnight at all the iPhone stores, because some had to have the latest and greatest, has the iPhone syndrome infected the PC world, or did it just spread by itself? :D
Some people have FOMO (fear of missing out), others just want to flex. In any case you can get excellent performance by spending wisely.
Mr Bill
Don't know a thang :D about Ryzen's is this a good deal?

That's MSRP. Given the current prices many other products are seeing right now I'd say the CPU is a good deal. The motherboard is not though, I'd recommend getting something like this: www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-B450M-DS3H-V2-Motherboard/dp/B08KWMXGQW/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=b450+motherboard&qid=1613252680&sr=8-1 (this is version 2 of the board that supports all 3000 series CPUs out of the box, no need to worry about BIOS). That's $273 for the Motherboard + CPU + Cooler (included with CPU). You should be able to pickup DDR4 3200 for pretty cheap as well.

Typically I'd recommend the Ryzen 1600 as it usually offers better value but right now at around $180 it offers worse value than the 3600. The above linked motherboard supports all Ryzen 5000 series CPUs as well should you want to upgrade in the future.
Posted on Reply
#69
efikkan
I hope this price dump is an indication that Intel have plenty of Rocket Lake chips coming in.
Prima.Vera
this year 11700K, but also 12700K CPUs will come out.
Does anyone else cares about the 10xxx series??
Really....
Most PC builders are looking for value, not the greatest performance. Comet Lake is widely available right now, stable and have great prices. Such discounts are attractive for many buyers, but probably not interesting for most of us in here. :)
Posted on Reply
#70
ZoneDymo
Prima.Vera
this year 11700K, but also 12700K CPUs will come out.
Does anyone else cares about the 10xxx series??
Really....
I think the question sooner is: Does anyone care about the 11xxx series?
Barely a jump in performance but it will cost more because "new" and 2 less cores on the high end, still a dead-end platform.
So if anything you would get a 10 series or Ryzen 3000 for cheap, Ryzen 5000 if you can afford and get it, or wait to see if Alder-Lake is worth a damn I would think.

the 11xxx series is really an odd duck.
Posted on Reply
#71
RandallFlagg
ZoneDymo
I think the question sooner is: Does anyone care about the 11xxx series?
Barely a jump in performance but it will cost more because "new" and 2 less cores on the high end, still a dead-end platform.
So if anything you would get a 10 series or Ryzen 3000 for cheap, Ryzen 5000 if you can afford and get it, or wait to see if Alder-Lake is worth a damn I would think.

the 11xxx series is really an odd duck.
I suppose Zen 3 is also an odd duck that no one should care about as well.

Posted on Reply
#72
qcmadness
RandallFlagg
I said 7nm. More than half of TSMCs capacity is larger than 12nm.

You list fab 12 for example. Below is a breakdown, the red circled nodes are 16nm, 20nm, and 28-150nm parts of fab 12. The total capacity of that fab is 77500-123800, and most of it is not 7nm.



Intel's fab in Oregon is more sophisticated:


Are your information updated?

www.digitimes.com/news/a20200902PD200.html

TSMC 7nm process output to top 140,000 wafers monthly


And what you have got in Wikipedia, is using the source in year 2013. No wonder there is no 7nm capacity.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabrication_plants#cite_note-SEMI-1
Posted on Reply
#73
RandallFlagg
qcmadness
Are your information updated?

www.digitimes.com/news/a20200902PD200.html

TSMC 7nm process output to top 140,000 wafers monthly


And what you have got in Wikipedia, is using the source in year 2013. No wonder there is no 7nm capacity.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabrication_plants#cite_note-SEMI-1
So lets recap this:

I said : "They [Intel] probably have more 10nm capacity than TSMC has 7nm capacity."

This simple comment seems to be beyond your ability to comprehend or deal with at some level.

So you stated that TSMC had multiple gigafabs that can make > 100,000 wafers per month, implying that they could make ~500K+ 7nm wafers per month. That was easily debunked as that is (maybe) total capacity of those fabs, not their 7nm capacity.

You clearly were not aware that a chip plant has multiple fab nodes. See previous post.

So now you are saying something different, that TSMC has 140,000 wafers per month capacity on 7nm total, after expansion in late 2020?

Well at least you're learning to use the internet to get facts. It might interest you that I long ago read that article.

So here are some facts you might have found had you bothered to check the other side of the equation.

Intel does not give us direct numbers like that for their capacity, but we do know what their overall capacity is and how many fabs they have, and which ones can make 10nm. We also know that when Intel converts a fab, they convert the whole thing, that's why the Oregon fab can make 10 and 14nm on all nodes. Two nodes can make 22nm, and two others are being upgraded to do 7nm. With the exception of a couple of older fabs (which do 65nm / 32nm for legacy spares) that is the Intel way.

Intel has 15 fabs. They have about 890,000 wafer starts per month total. This means the average fab has 890,000 / 15 = 59133 wafer starts per month. 3 of their fabs are 10nm.

3 10nm fabs x 59133 wafers / month = 177,400 wafers / month.

177,400 > 140,000

Except, Fab 42, is 10nm and is by far their largest fab. So they can probably make more than that. Anyway, I used the word probably, and all available data backs that up.

So are you now informed?
qcmadness
And what you have got in Wikipedia, is using the source in year 2013. No wonder there is no 7nm capacity.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabrication_plants#cite_note-SEMI-1
There are 387 references there. Many are from 2020. How on earth you zeroed in on just the first reference is a mystery.
Posted on Reply
#74
gsvelto
Turmania
why would you undercut a competitor, when their products are hardly available to be sold. but still a good move from Intel.
Supply and demand. Some people must still picking AMD processors over Intel even with the inflated prices and wait times for getting Ryzen 3 CPUs.
Posted on Reply
#75
qcmadness
RandallFlagg
So lets recap this:

I said : "They [Intel] probably have more 10nm capacity than TSMC has 7nm capacity."

This simple comment seems to be beyond your ability to comprehend or deal with at some level.

So you stated that TSMC had multiple gigafabs that can make > 100,000 wafers per month, implying that they could make ~500K+ 7nm wafers per month. That was easily debunked as that is (maybe) total capacity of those fabs, not their 7nm capacity.

You clearly were not aware that a chip plant has multiple fab nodes. See previous post.

So now you are saying something different, that TSMC has 140,000 wafers per month capacity on 7nm total, after expansion in late 2020?

Well at least you're learning to use the internet to get facts. It might interest you that I long ago read that article.

So here are some facts you might have found had you bothered to check the other side of the equation.

[red]Intel does not give us direct numbers like that for their capacity, but we do know what their overall capacity is and how many fabs they have, and which ones can make 10nm. We also know that when Intel converts a fab, they convert the whole thing, that's why the Oregon fab can make 10 and 14nm on all nodes. Two nodes can make 22nm, and two others are being upgraded to do 7nm. With the exception of a couple of older fabs (which do 65nm / 32nm for legacy spares) that is the Intel way.

Intel has 15 fabs. They have about 890,000 wafer starts per month total. This means the average fab has 890,000 / 15 = 59133 wafer starts per month. 3 of their fabs are 10nm.[/red]


3 10nm fabs x 59133 wafers / month = 177,400 wafers / month.

177,400 > 140,000

Except, Fab 42, is 10nm and is by far their largest fab. So they can probably make more than that. Anyway, I used the word probably, and all available data backs that up.

So are you now informed?



[blue]There are 387 references there. Many are from 2020. How on earth you zeroed in on just the first reference is a mystery.[/blue]
The text in red is your speculation but not fact.

The text in blue is what you is using to claim TSMC is not that advanced. The [1] is the reference that I posted. You then just used the 2013 reference and claim that the fabs are not upgraded at all in 8 years. It is you that need comprehension.

At least I tried to check with the capacity. You use speculations only.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment